Art of Manipulation (or how to survive the capitalist system)

[Lilith]

Art of Manipulation
How to survive the capitalist system

After reading "Petit cours d'auto-défense intellectuelle" I decided to share some of the psychological self-defense techniques I've been reading about since I judged them to be very useful. I’ll explain in here some of the very frequent techniques used by governements, TV, corporations and various other forms of autority to manipulate you. Knowing them may help you identify those.

First, it is essential to know a sophism is an argument used in purpose to fool someone. It seems to make sense but they usually are illogical or aren’t based on any real fact. There’s also what we call "fallacy". Despite of the fact a fallacies (or paralogisms), just like sophisms, also are some arguments relying on an illogical or uncorrect concequence, they are not necesserily used on purpose to fool someone. Most of the time, people won't even conciously use it. In order to refer to the concept of illogical usage of language in a general way instead of only its use on purpose, I judged, in the following text, the usage of "fallacy" to be revelant.

There are a multiple techniques used to manipulate. Some of them are easily noticeable, but some are not. Let’s just start with the most frequent ones medias and corporations are abusively using

I. Vocabulary

The vocabulary used into a text is really important since it has a huge impact on the feelings and beliefs of the reader. We can divide vocabulary in two different aspects: Connotation and Slang.

a) Connotation

Let’s just see those two versions of the same scenario:

When they entered, the bus started to smell very nasty. Those guys were all dirt and smelt like hell. It was just totally disgusting. Those guys just looked so uncivilized with their clothes and faces full of mud and grass. Nowadays, adolescents are getting worst and worst. They seem not to understand the concept of proprety and cleaning. That's the result of a laxist education.

As they entered the bus, I knew they've probably been playing for a long while. Luckily for them, it was a sunny day so they did not have to endure rain. All those football players were looking trained and muscular. They probably were training a lot! It’s fun to see how adolescents are involved in sports and activities nowadays.

You probably noticed the effects connotation had on the text. They transmited a total different feeling. While reading the first one, we get to believe they all look like stinky pigs while the other one shows how healthy and active they are. Medias, advertisers, politicians and even parents are using it to convince you their ideas are the best. When used correctly, connotations can twist anything to the advantage of the manipulator.

b) Slang

The slang regroups all the specific words related to complex domains (as Science, Maths, Medecine, Environment, etc.) and folks moslty don't know these. They usually are long and look complicated despite of the fact they very often describe some easy concepts to understand. Those words give some kind of credibility to the people using them. They look like they know what they are talking about since they appear to be very knowledgeable people. Althought, their explanations, most of the time, don't necesserily require the usage of those specific words. That means they can easily be clear and understandable by majority.

II. Fallacy

A Fallacy is an argument which seems convincing but isn't logically structured nir is based on solid reasonings. There are two kinds of Fallacies: Formal and informal. The formal one relies on a wrong logical structure while the second does not rely on a wrong logical reasoning. Let's take a look to the main types of Fallacies.

a) Fallacy of accident

The Fallacy of accident has this form:

All A’s are B
C is a A
Then C is B

It takes the form of a very logical situation.
example:

All men are mortals
Liche is a man
Then Liche is mortal

This logical reasoning makes sense. Now, using the same form, let's use other words.

All members of World Republic are cool
Philip is cool
Then Philip is a member of World Republic.

Some members of World Republic are Communists
Hutin is member of World Republic
Then Hutin is Communist

See. Those 2 sentences are looking logic, but when we take the time to analyze them, we notice they aren’t logic at all. All the members of World Republic are cool doesn't mean all cool people are on World Republic. Same with the second one: the fact SOME people are communist doesn’t mean everyone is. But the logical form keeps the same pattern than the first one example. That kind of fallacy is easy to notice, but can also be very sly.

b) Affirming the consequence

If P, therefore Q
So Q
Then P

Fallacy exemple:
It rains, therefore, the streets are wet
So because the streets are wet
Then it rains

The reasoning can be okay, but the logic isn't always right. It's not because something leads to another that this second thing necesserily leads to the first. That's what we call "Affirming the conscequence."

c) Appeal to autority

Appeal to autority consists into using autority to convince people a concept, a thought, a product, or a value is right. For example, the usage of logo is one. We can see it in medias too; when they quote scientists or experts, we believe them because they have the support of researches and we see them as intelligent people that studied a lot.

"Scientifical experiments proved X is right"

We hear it very frequently at the radio on TV, for example. It's a great technique because it automatically makes the audience think it's trustable. Plus the folks have no way to prove them wrong: they have no choice but trust them. As I said precedently, appeal to autority is also made when using the reputation of a corporation to convince people something is good. Once, I made an oral presentation for my french class and we decided to invent a false petition full of fallacies. To make our way to convince people, we used the logos of three different corporations and organisms well known here -in Quebec-. Because of that, more than 90% of the class decided to put their signature. If they accepted, it's mostly because they trusted those organisms or groups (Green Peace, Société Québécoise du Cancer and Le sommet du Millénaire). Even the teacher believed us, even if everything on the paper was completely fictive. The appeal to autority is a really effective way to influence people's decisions.

d) Ad Hominen

The Ad Hominen consists into a personal attack and is part of the most frequently used and efficient technique. However, it's one of the easiest one to notice. The objective is to divert the attention of the audience by attacking the caracteristical traits of the person instead of the argument or idea itself. This way, the manipulator discredits the arguments of that person to the eyes of the audience.

For example, into a leftist discussion, someone quotes a good point about Friedman, a rightist economist. Someone discrediting the argument only because the idea is associated to the right-wing is committing an Ad Hominen. Let's take Trolls as a second example: we all consider everything they say is made to disturb us without no exact prove of it. Those are deductions that are not necesserily always justified.

However, it is important to mention in certain cases, it's totally legitimate to ignore certain arguments. Only us can judge the limit, case by case.

e) Ad Populum (Appeal to the people)

"Most people think communism is bad. Therefore, communism must be bad."

An Ad populum is a fallacious argument relying on the majority's opinion to make the subject percieve the proposition as "true" or good" . "If a lot of people believe it is right, it must be right". This type of fallacy is committed while trying to convince someone that an idea, a service, a product, a way of living or an ideology is good because of the simple fact many people are thinking it's right.

Advertizers use this technique all the time:
"We are the leading brand in America, that' why you should choose us!"
"This is the #1 listened radio!"
In society, most of the people are really influenced by others. Fashion, brands, even anorexia... All those social phenomenon are result of this obsession of "being like everyone". No one wants to be appart, because they don't want to be judged. Medias show us an image of society showing everyone looking the same, everyone eating the same, everyne loving the same things . Ads are showing us what we want to see instead of what's real. They manipulate verity to make us think we need their product to feel good.

f) Appeal to fear

The appeal to fear (or Argumentum in terrorem) is committed when fear is created in purpose to convince an idea is good. It's widely committed in politics and marketing.

I've got a very good example of appeal to fear. As I explained before, I made a presentation and we wanted people to sign a false petition. The text was trying to convince the audience that the chemical element Ru (Ruthenium) was dangerous for health:

"This product could be very toxic"
"In contact to certain other types of metal, Ruthenium can explode"
"It could be cancerigen"
"We can find it in many objects we use very often, as pen, CDs, DVDs and High quality Speekers"

It helped to convince people to write their signature down because they felt concerned about it. They felt like they were in danger even though they never heard about exploding pens or other problems concerning Ruthenium. Appeal to fear is hard to detect because it not always explicit. This technique was used by Catholic Church in purpose to get money and power (Middle-Age) "If you don't ..., you'll go to hell" "God will punish you if you don't ...". This way, they have been able to manipulate and have total control on millions of people during a very long time. (Even nowadays)

g) Argument ad misericordiam (Appeal to Pity)

The Argument ad misericordiam (or appeal to pity) is a fallacy consisting into exploiting his opponent's feeling of pity or guilt.

"Given to the fact that man has been living terrible events, we can easily understand the reasons why he took such a decision"
"You must have given me a good grade. I studied for weeks and if I fail I'm in trouble!!!"

This type of argument doesn't invalidate the conclusion. There may be other reasons to accept the conclusion but appeal to pity must not count as one of them.

h) Argument ad ignorantiam (Appeal to ignorance)

The argument ad ignorantiam (appeal to ignorance) is a fallacy committed when it is claimed that a premise is true for the simple fact it's not proven false, or false because it's not proven true.

"God isn't real because nothing proved his existance"
"No one proved that God isn't real, therfore it's true"

We can notice the usage of this type of fallacy into justice system. Presumption of innocence or guilt:
"This man is claimed guilty because his innocence cannot be proven" or
"This man is claimed innocent since there's nothing proving he's guilty"

Both are logical fallacies.



There's a lot of different other types I could talk about but I felt the need of slecting only few of them: the principal ones. I could still write on that topic for pages and pages, but I better simply stop here for now. If you have any comment, suggestion or question, I'll read it attentively and take the time to answer. I will be glad to add some more if anyone asks for it.

I really hope you enjoyed reading and I also hope it was helpful. Always be aware when you debate, watch TV, listen to radio, etc.. Don't let others decide what you need. Only you can know. Don't let them manipulate your brain. Say stop to the capitalist brainwashing tendencies

[Raptor Jesus]

I'm assuming from this that you don't hail from WWC...

[Raptor Jesus]

Oh, and on your fallacy of accident.
Sounds plainly subjective.

[Shuckle]

Swizzles, it's plainly a fallacy. I could whip out my Logic textbook and confirm it if you want.

[Lilith]

I'm assuming from this that you don't hail from WWC...

What's WWC?

Oh, and on your fallacy of accident.
Sounds plainly subjective.

Well, I'd say pretty much everything can be subjective in that text. I don't see how this one could sound more subjective than any other one. It's always a question of facts. Fallacy of accident simply relies on false causalities.

Squares are rectangles, but rectangles are not necesserily squares.

The logical structure is good, but the reasoning is not. Seems simple and easily noticeable like that, but this can apply to larger and more complex contexts too.

I hope that's what you meant

Swizzles, it's plainly a fallacy. I could whip out my Logic textbook and confirm it if you want.

haha

[Raptor Jesus]

Well, I'd say pretty much everything can be subjective in that text. I don't see how this one could sound more subjective than any other one. It's always a question of facts. Fallacy of accident simply relies on false causalities.

Squares are rectangles, but rectangles are not necesserily squares.

The logical structure is good, but the reasoning is not. Seems simple and easily noticeable like that, but this can apply to larger and more complex contexts too.

I hope that's what you meant

Don't worry, that's follows what I meant.

[Raptor Jesus]

What's WWC?

I...
We...

Man...
Well it's a place where the majority of everyone here migrated from.

We couldn't take it back there, moderation was comprised of red-tape bureaucracy and pansies hiding behind power, and administrators that don't seem to give a **** what the mods report us for.

In other words, it's a sub-forum on a game called Roblox which I've been playing since 2008

[Lilith]

Aw! :O okay! Thanks for explanations. I was actualy wondering what Roblox was since i've been reading this word a couple times here XD

[Shuckle]

It's a game you don't want to play :^|

[Raptor Jesus]

It's disappointing because the community is comprised of little kids (Ages 7-11) sometimes there are older people, but that's not common.

We're pretty much old people in a candy shop.
Save for meat who is a senior citizen.

[Shuckle]

Hey, there are older people than me on the forum, ie Patsfan, Piplup.

[Raptor Jesus]

Hey, there are older people than me on the forum, ie Patsfan, Piplup.

Piplup?
You mean prinplup?

I thought he was 11...

[Shuckle]

I forget, it's one of those, definitely not empoleon though.

I'm pretty sure he said he was 21. Or maybe there's multiple piplups/prinplups.

[Mr. Big]

That was interesting

c. is called the halo effect, isn't it? Due to the "halo" it creates over the head of the person, thus making them seem like they're right no matter what?

[Shuckle]

That was interesting

c. is called the halo effect, isn't it? Due to the "halo" it creates over the head of the person, thus making them seem like they're right no matter what?

In the same way that felis domesticus is called KITTY KITTY KITTY KITTY KITTY.

Or to put it another way, Lenny calls it the halo effect and George calls it an appeal to authority.